done would only prolong its life four or five years. the basic systems, in addition to seismic upgrade, it needs new plumbing and ventilation services. it is an old style who tell with bathrooms down the hall for most of the units, which has proven to be a less stable environment for the population we are trying to serve than one where folks have their own bathroom and acked to cooking. for these reasons we are asking specifically for an exception for the arlington hotel of this specific requirement. in our mind, the risk to be assessed is whether or not we will be able to count on it fulfilling its public purpose for the length of time we would be making this loan. it would be a 55-year deferred payment loan like all of our own loans. the question to ask would be whether mers could, with the

assistance we put in place for operating costs, would they be able to do that. they have a very strong track record of serving this population. in any event, if they for some reason went out of business or were able to continue to serve the population we have in mind, we have in our loan documents the right to replace with with another service provider and owner. for these reasons, we ask your approval on this ordinance. we have someone from housing here, and someone from m.o.h. to talk more specifically about the project itself if you want to hear that. supervisor maxwell: colleagues, would you like to hear that, or any more comments or questions? i think we are ok. let's open this up to public comment. >> walter paulson. i hope you fix this building.

in case the earth moves under our feet. and the ski tumbling down. i want you to fix it up all-around. because buildings break down, and we need it fixed. and i hope you do it quick. i feel the earth move under my feet. >> i feel the sky tumbling down. fix it up all-around. supervisor maxwell: thank you. any further public comment? seeing none, then public comment is closed. colleagues,hen without objection, we will move this forward with recommendation. so moved. madam clerk, item number eight? >> resolution establishing an area plan infrastructure committee to supervise a consultant study regarding infrastructure finance districts. >> colleagues, this is the next step in an important conversation that we started in

the context of our planning work for the eastern neighborhood. it started with the discussion that the cost of all neighborhood improvements in our plan areas would exceed revenues generated. we need to be focused and creative in identifying additional financial tools to meet our objectives. i want to thank everyone for their hard work to get to this point. it is now time to broaden our discussion to cover all the adopted plan areas in the city, and i look forward to a more detailed exploration of the infrastructure finance district idea. i would also like to ask for an amendment of the whole. i would offer it -- which would add a more robust description of the needs, analysis and back

ground for the market, octavia area. >> thank you, chair. supervisors, in your packet you have a resolution from the planning commission. they did consider this draft resolution as well as another introduced by the mayor. this one, as supervisor maxwell said, discusseses facilities districts. the planning commission did recommend that you approve it, but they wanted you to take special consideration to two issues. first, they wanted the board or other decision-makers to seek additional funding to extend this pilot program to all the eastern neighborhoods. in addition to the pilot. f.d. resolution proposed, it is

important this knee committee be tasked with the development of eafer i.f.d. for the neighborhoods area. funding will be identified in the short term by the committee. this neighborhood has existing forecast deficit, and the city could better address this by establishing an i.f.d. in this area. the department continues to look for grant funding for such a study, but we encourage you to keep this need in mind if you have access to any other funds. the second issue they wanted to draw your attention was to ensure the committee studies the long-term effect on the general fund. i didn't really describe what the infrastructure district does, but for those of you who are familiar with re-development law. the i.f.c. allows us to capture a portion of the property tax.

as property values rise, that increment of rise is captured for the district. i wanted to ensure that as we capture this new increase in property values for the benefit of a specific limited geographic area, be aware that necessarily diverts funding from the city an general fund. a portion of this new commitment is made possible by the zoning changes in the eastern district areas, but only a portion of the property tax revenues should be diverted to the area plan needs. this would enable continued money to the general if you said to ensure city-wide services. the commission recommended this committee study the effects on the general fund revenues and to ensure the city as a whole maintains a well-funded base. supervisor maxwell: is there anything in the resolution that

would prohibit that? do we need to call it out specifically? i thought in some ways when we said it is now time to broaden our discussion to cover all the plan areas in the city and look forward to a more detailed exploration of the finance district, that that would go a lock long way to covering those issues? >> it would be. that would be a nice resolved clause or a whereas clause, whatever your preference may be, but encouraging the committee to keep in mind the impacts of this diversion of fund to this specific geographic area. that would be part of their study. they are tasked with studying those sorts of issues, and that would be important to call that

out. supervisor maxwell: city attorney, would there be a problem in adding that? so could you give us some wording on that, and we could add that? gnawed gnawed supervisor maxwell: ok, d [inaudible] supervisor maxwell: ok, perfect. colleagues, i would like to open this up to public comment if you have no questions or comments? public comment then on this issue. jamie whitaker? one card. >> good afternoon supervisors. i would like to thank supervisor maxwell especially for working to improving the developer stimulus. at first i was very much against the stimulus legislation that did not have up front fee, and am pleased we did get something with 15%. this neighborhood is not really

represented by a formal c.a.c. it is not part of the eastern neighborhoods, and as we all know, development is stalled. we have a lot of folks living in the neighborhood. it runs all the way up to market street. we have millennium, which is a 6-00 foot to your, one renkin hill, which sticks out like a sore thumb, and the infinite. so 1,500 additional residents have come to the neighborhood. i live at bakers towers, built in 1991, the first mid rise condominium built after the earthquake. while there are children's playgrounds planned for the trance bay transit center, that lovely park we hope to see in 2017 and a couple of other parks i will show you, the kids

right now need space to run around. anything that can help to hasteen the development of open spaces and other infrastructure like traffic calming and other needs for this community, to encourage people to get out of their cars and walk, use bikes. public transit would be wonderful. on the projector i have a plan that -- could we see what is on the overhead, please? sfgov, please? supervisor maxwell: it takes a second. >> anyway, there are already two projects with plans. it has been vetted on the community. the one i have on the projector right now is for a park.

the parks and rec department have conducted things to get outreach from neigeach from nei. we came to consensus as a community. it is just awaiting funding. this might help to get that built. earlier this year we had the three month process with the beloved open space access at 333 harrison street. it has a bacci ball court, a children's play area, and a dog play area, but it needs money. we are waiting for prop 84 funding. this would be a great step. thank you. supervisor maxwell: thank you. any further public comment on this item? please come forward if you want to comment. >> yes, espanola jackson,

bayview hunter's point. i went to each of your offices this morning to distribute a news report that came from the mercury in san jose. it's a discussion -- with the press conference at 10:00 this morning, i thought sure some of you would have been there. it was by invitation only. the statement is they are going to use 50 trucks daly for the next three years bringing the dirt and the rocks to the hunter's point shipyard and also over there to -- between the bay bridge. what is the name of that? i am getting old and slow now.

supervisor maxwell: i know what you mean. they just tore down -- i am getting old, too. >> they built that in the 30's there in the middle of the bay. what am i speaking of? i know someone in the background knows it. you pass by it on the freeway. you can turn off and go to that air there where you have the homeless living and other people living. it is really something. wait just a minute here. hunter's point and treasure island. it is right here. right here. now, i didn't know anything about this, and i contactsed -- contacted the mercury, and i don't know if any of you supervisors new about this. our community didn't know we

were going to have 50 trucks coming in and out of your community for the next three years with all of this hauling. when i was at the other hearing, i was wondering why you can't tax these big traction coming into our communities, like a dollar per axle. i think we should be getting something out of this. did any of you know this was going on? what are you going to do about it, and how are you going to talk with cal tran. the name of the person, the developer, is on here. did you receive yours? supervisor maxwell: my staff, we are on that right now. i want to thank you very much for that. >> yes, because you think we should have known about this, the citizens of san francisco, all of the citizens. i don't like the fact that we are just being told.

one of the things i am concerned with is where they are going to put this dirt when the shipyard has not been cleaned. they have not removed the toxic dirt already there. supervisor maxwell: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >>ed madam president and supervisors, good afternoon. i am with residential builders. i am here today so say we are very much in support of the resolution before you today. as participants of the eastern neighborhoods rezoning process finalized two years ago, it was raise at many meetings. at the time it was envisioned that i.f.d.'s would back fill the race ose for areas that had substantial zoning or large new

residential developments. to go to the community infrastructure would be above the baseline tax today. supervisor maxwell: one second. espanola, we will be in touch with you on that. >> thank you. supervisor maxwell: go ahead. >> it is only fair to support the communities that have reaped the benefit to the neighborhood. the city could issue bonds to move projects forward based on the guaranteed stream of income from increment finance districts. this proposal would complement all of the earlier plans, and i urge you to support it today. supervisor maxwell: thank you. >> there's a spark of magic in your eyes.

candyland appears all over the land. never knew that fairy tales come true, but they come true with the city park and you. you're a cityland jeannie in surprise -- genie. i bet you, this is the land and park i have been waiting for forever, and ever will you fulfill all our dreams. thank you, please. supervisor maxwell: any further public comment? seeing none, then public comment is closed. thank you for joining us. let me say that the whole point of the group and the study is

to explore the t.i.f. we have people on that committee like the controller, the budget office, et cetera. part of the reason they are on there is to track and make sure that the general fund is not adversely affected. you can talk to that as well. >> good afternoon, supervisors, and chair maxwell. i apologize. i was held up and then agenda item eight came up, and i ran down here. thank you for accepting my comments after public comment. i understand that ann-marie from planning summarized what it was about. supervisor maxwell: you are part of the staff. >> i don't know how much additional information you need. i did want to highlight at least -- perhaps reemphasize the scope of what we will be studying and give you a preview of what we hope to do in the

next two months to get this process moving. first of all, as you know, the committee has four taskses which came out of a lengthy process, a working group that was part of the eastern neighborhoods process. this picks it up where that working group left it off. they will manage and oversee a consultant study to form the formation of both a pilot i.f.d. and a c.f.d. it will look at both the eastern neighborhood broadly and specifically at rincon hill. that consultant study referenced in the resolution will look at the general fund and a whole bunch of different scenarios and specifically how will different types of i.f.d.'s affect general fund revenues. that will be a major focus of

this effort. we hope to report back to this committee several times during the course of this study. secondly, the goal, from that study and feedback, develop a clear statement of policy we go to guide the use of i.f.d.'s in recently adopted area plans city-wide. some members of the public had expressed concerned that we were focusing on only eastern neighborhood. we view this as a city-wide policy. i have been describing the i.f.d. as a smart growth carrot . in other words, it is a way to reward neighborhoods that have had substantial growth, but to ensure it protects the city's well-being. the committee will supervise the formation of a proposed

pilot i.f.d. based on draft i.f.d. policy developed over the course of the committee's work. and then finally it is our goal to provide you with such proposals or rexations within the months of the initiation of this work. that is an ambitious schedule, you i realize. the exro situation of the committee, planning, e. w., controller and staff will be involved. we have the ability to invite people like d.p.d., rec and park, for example, if they would like to be part of the process. we have committed to having four public stake holder seats identical to what we had on the eastern neighborhood working group. we have dedicated two -- well one, to the eastern neighborhood c.a.c. and another to a representative

of the market, octavia, c.a.c. the others are at large seats, and the president of the board would have the ability to appoint all four seats. president chiu, we look forward to working with your office to identify those as soon as possible. and then finally, the chair of the area plan infrastructure plan finance committee would be a subcommittee of the planning process. that committee i referred to would first be presented to the capital planning committee before coming to this body. i think that provide a summer of what this resolution does. as i said, this resolution is a committee to study and produce all of those it's. i think there has been some confusion in the public that today we are initiating an

i.f.d., and we are not doing that. the next step, well hopefully be back before this committee by mid september. that is our goal. we want to get a few of the procedural requirements for the pilot i.f.d. out of the way. there are three resslations in draft form that will be introduced tomorrow at the board, for the pilot i.f.d. they are procedural. they are necessary if we are goinging to prepare what is called an infrastructure finance plan over the course of august, september and october. if we delay, there is a whole series of public notice and time lines that shift further and further back. i wanted to give the committee a heads-up that we are going to be introducing draft resolutions tomorrow. when you come back from being off, i will discuss them.

recently was created an economic analyst and policy pool. we don't have to go through a lengthy process. we can actually select firms that have already qualified with the city from that pool, and we are going to do that. i did have one request. in reviewing the changes. they were already submitted. supervisor maxwell: yes. >> great. we had one other change on page five of the draft resolution. >> be presented to the c.p.c. for their review and approval prior to formation of i.f.d. wented to change "initiation" to "formation." if you would consent to that,

we would appreciate it very much. supervisor maxwell: all right. i have a question. we just hard -- heard something -- from parker last week. >> yes. maxwell they could take advantage of something like this? >> it could theoretically be a candidate. we need to develop those policy first so if they would independently qualify for this sort of up zoning that we want to limit the use of i.f.d. the controller and the budget analyst office has been very clear to us. this is a powerful tool but one that needs to be used judiciously. if we didn't establish,, people would want their hand in the cookie jar. supervisor maxwell: we are talking about bus lines.

we are talking about infrastructure that are public. >> yes. supervisor maxwell: so it is not as if it is something that is not for the public good. it is something that really helps the entire public and the people who live around there. >> yes. supervisor maxwell: my thinking is, to some degree, the general finet would have to be used for that in specific instances. it is not as if you didn't have to use it anyway. >> personally i love the idea. i am reluctant given all the demand on the general fund, prior to us completing this task that you set forth, i can't prognosticate whether that would apply. it would allow amazing things if it did. supervisor maxwell: mission bay is built, people are living there, and we have two bus lines. if we had something specific would not be the case.

they would be there at the same time or maybe even before, and people could make decisions based on transportation. when you give people cars and parking -- giving people cars and parking is out. so i think we should consider something -- we will always find other things to do with the money. but when it comes down to it, i think this is really unfortunate. mission bay is unfortunate. >> and you have always said, we want to build complete neighborhoods. i think i've heard that maybe 100 times. this is an exciting way to fulfill that promise. >> well, thank you very much. >> then, why don't we take the line with the formation. without objection, so moved. then on the legislation as amended, without objection so

moved. madam clerk, is there any further business before this committee? >> no. chair maxwell: then this meeting is adjourned. thank you.